christians in tunes past did obserue as in the fourth rule we haue spoken also reckoneth vp many more rites ceremonies all the which long time since haue ben out of vse euen in the Church of Rome So that héerein our aduersaries doo not onely contend with vs but euen with Epiphanius himselfe and with other whose obiections they vse against vs. For if those olde rytes and ceremonies be traditions of the Apostles or if they haue like force with the scripture or if they be worthie of the like credite together with the scripture If also sith they be traditions and therefore we must séeke no farther if faith ought to be the obseruer and kéeper of these traditions as the olde and auncient Doctors saye whom our aduersaries bring for the maintenaunce of their cause what impudent boldnesse were this then not onelye to neglect those traditions but also nowe that they haue bene these many yeres put cleane off from the Church and growen out of the memorie of man béeing forlorne with time so that they séeme to be altogether mouldie and couered with hoarinesse What shall they then which are aduersaries of traditions doo if they dare doo these things themselues which are the great defenders of traditions Hierome Doo you demaund where it is written I aunswere in the Acts of the Apostles yea also if it had no authoritie of Scripture yet the consent of the whole worlde in this parte obtaineth the like authoritie as a precept for many other things which are obserued and kept in the Church by tradition take vnto themselues the like authoritie as hath the lawe written as in baptisme three times to dippe the head vnder water of the tasting of Milke and honnie c. Héere Hierome disputed of the unposition of handes after Baptisme and of other rites and ceremonies touching the which thing we haue spoken in our fourth rule but we doo dispute now and in this place of those things which are necessarie and doo appertaine vnto faith and saluation among the which if you will number vâ—â—hose rites and ceremonies what will our aduersaries aunswere which admit vse not the tasting of milke and honnie which Hierome héere maketh mention of And also Hierome witnesseth that y â— was confirmed by the consent of the whole world which is now reiected by the like Augustine Touching those things wherof the Scripture hath not determined therin the custome of the people and ordinance of our fathers are to be obserued in steede of a lawe And againe Those things which are not vvritten but are kept by tradition vvhich are obserued throughout the vvhole vvorld it appeareth by the authoritie either of the Apostles or generall counsells vvhose authoritie in the Church is most profitable that those things ordained and constituted are to be kept and obserued as the passion of our Lord and his resurrection c. Augustine héere disputeth not touching principles of faith but of Ecclesiasticall rytes and ceremonies touching the which we haue spoken in the fourth rule And truly sith Augustine is lead onely by coniecture thereby it sufficientlye appeareth that he intreateth not of things necessarye to faith But the selfe same Augustine in his Epistle following doth greatly lament the cause that the Scriptures being neglected all the whole world was full of suppositions and giueth vs admonishment to submit our selues vnto the easie yoake of Christ I beséech you what wold he theÌ„ haue saide if he had séene that huge Chaos and mountaine of ceremonies and traditions a burden more gréeuous and heauier than Aetna hill wherewith the Bishoppes of Rome long time since haue oppressed the Church And peraduenture many other moe such like examples as these may be taken out of the old fathers and alleadged but the solution of them may easily be gathered had from the answeres which I haue alreadie set downe And lest the defenders of traditions shuld thinke that the auncient Doctours did so commend Traditions that thereby they would derogate the authoritie of the scriptures behold euen the old Doctors themselues as witnesses in this matter and shall declare their owne mindes what they thinke touching the Scriptures and touching traditions not written and wée our selues will say nothing And that the wound which by their former obiections they séeme to giue vs be euen by their owne handes healed vp againe That we maye lawfully affirme it much better to followe the Doctours with the Scriptures then the same Doctours wandering without the Scripture if it so happen at anie time and so to be carried from the truth which thing indeede doth rather deserue pardon theÌ„ foolish imitation But nowe let vs heare the Doctours themselues The sixt Chapter IRenaeus First the Apostles did preach the word of God and afterward by the will of God committed it to writings and deliuered it to vs that the same Gospell so written should be the foundation and piller of our faith Againe It behooueth vs to flie vnto the Church and to be fostered in her bosome and nourished by the word of God written The paradise of the Church is planted heere in this worlde thou maist eate of the tree of the Paradise saith the spirit of God that is feede you of euerie Scripture of God Tertulian Take awaie from the heretikes those things wherein they agree with the Ethnikes that they may ground their questions vppon the holye Scriptures alone then they cannot preuaile Thus did Tertulian in times past confute the Heretikes but nowe they are accounted Heretikes of the Bishoppes of the Romish Church which woulde confirme their opinions by the Scriptures And againe the sayde Tertulian We ought not to bee curious nowe after the comming of Christ Iesus neither ought wee to bee inquisitiue after the manifestation of the Gospell When we doo beleeue wee desire nothing else to beleeue for this first wee doo beleeue that there is nothing else that wee ought to beleeue but onelye faith And againe Let Hermogenes see that he teach that which is written but if it be not written let him feare that curse which is prepared for those that either adde too or diminish anie thing from the holy Scriptures Origen Wee must of necessitie call the holy Scriptures for witnesse for as well our senses as also our interpretations without the witnesse of the Scriptures are worthy of no credit Iustinus Martyre Iustinus did flye vnto the holye Scriptures that hee might bee safe in all things Athanasius The holie and diuine Scriptures of GOD are sufficient to the declaration and manifestation of the truth Hilarie It is sufficient for vs that we bee contented with the Scriptures Cyril All thinges which Christ did are not written but what thinges the writers thought sufficient both for manners doctrine are written Chrisostome If wee haue neede either to learne or to forsake anie thing let vs learne it in the holy
which they call Apostolike wée denie that they are the traditions of y e Apostles then they recite Tertulian Ireneus and especially one Clement I knowe not who which of late yeres hath stepped out of the Monkish Cloisters all these Doctors saie our aduersaries affirme the traditions to be the traditions of y e Apostles But if such kind of traditions are to be receiued w t like authoritie with the scriptures then it followeth that with like constancie of fayth we must beléeue that those traditions are the traditions of the 〈◊〉 euen as we beléeue that the hoye Scripture was â—witten by the commaundement of the holie Ghost The which if it bee true then it followeth againe that wée must euen giue the lyke credite to the writinges of Tertulian Irenaeus and Clement as we giue to the writinges of the Prophetes and Apostles But let it bée that sons demaundeth why I doe beleeue that the Apostles did preach by mouth that Christ was 〈◊〉 for our saluationâ— I â—â—â—swere that I beléeue because that the 〈◊〉 and Euangelisâ—e◠〈◊〉 so written But if I shouldâ— demaunde our 〈…〉 wherefore they beléeue that the Apostlâ—â— taâ—ght those 〈◊〉 by mouth whiâ—â— doe appertaine with their 〈◊〉 then they will aunswere they doe 〈◊〉 it because some of the olde Doctors 〈…〉 beléeue the writings of the 〈…〉 with the 〈…〉 belé the 〈…〉 Apostles I do not héere dispute 〈…〉 the mind opinion of the old fathers of which we wil speak in his proper place but héere only I am willing to maâ—â—e the consequent of our former proposition somewhat more plaine The Minor is manifest for what godly man did euer make the writings of the old fathers equiualent with the writings of y e Apostles Naie I suppose our aduersaries themselues will not say so except they bée altogether vnmindfull of their owne Canon taken out of Augustine And the force of the consequeÌ„t which we haue added vnto the end of the argument is manifest as it shall appeare in the argument heere following We maie not beleeue anie traditions touching the which there remaineth no certaintie But all traditions not written the which our aduersaries bring forth are euen such that there remaineth no certaintie touching them Ergo wee maye not beleeue anie traditions not written which our aduersaries bring or alleadge And by force of the consequent all traditions are to bee reiected and not to be receiued in causes of faith The truth of the Maior proposition is manifest of himselfe And the minor is prooued by these inductions following Clemens Alexandrinus affirmeth That the Apostles deliuered certaine secrets vnto some men as traditions from the apostles citeth this place of Paul 1. Cor. 2. We speak wisdome amongst those which are perfect Tertulian contrariwise refelleth that error with most graue arguments And Irenaeus saith That this was the opinion of the olde Heretikes and aunswereth that place of Paule which those Heretikes did corrupt Manie doo attribute the whole cannon of the Masse vnto the Apostles Contrariwise Saint Hierome and some other of the olde Fathers affirme that the Apostles were content with the Lordes praier Epiphanius saith That the Apostles did command both thursdaie and fridaie to be fasted through the whole yeare and that in the whole time of Lent onelie to vse bread salt and water Contrariwise Augustine saith That it was neuer determined by Christ nor his apostles what daies we should fast And Irenaeus writing to Eusebius saith That that fast of Lent was diuersly vsed in times past when some fasted one daye some two some more neither doth he call it a tradition of the Apostles but a custome of a simple and priuate institution Also Tertulian when he had made his reuolt from the Church vnto Montanus reckoning vp the obiections of the Catholikes which they vsed against the Montanists Because saith he we obserue the eating of drie meates they saie that the constituted fasting being worn out touching anie other we maie fast at our owne will not by the commaundement of anie lawe or discipline c. And in that controuersie touching Easter daie which a long time in times past troubled the Church those of the West saith Socrates referred their institution to Peter and Paule and those of the East to other of the Apostles but neither of theÌ„ broght foorth anie certaine or approued scripture for the profe thereof therefore I thinke it was a custome Tertulian saith That by traditioÌ„s of the Apostles milke and honnie was wont to be poured into the mouth of the infant in baptisme And Saint Hierome maketh mention onely of wine and not of honnie and calleth it custome Our aduersaries contrariwise obserue not theÌ„selues those rites ceremonies although they would bee accounted obseruers of the traditions which the Apostles left Tertulian in the former place maketh mention of oblations and offerings for birth daies to be amongst the rites and ceremonies which came from the Apostles Contrariwise the Church left this custome after the Nicene counsell for that it sauoured of Paganisme Manie of the olde Fathers referred these things vnto the Apostles first that it was not lawfull to kneele when they praied on the Sundaie And againe that it was not lawfull to decke the head with garlands and flowers and manie such like things Contrariwise our aduersaries themselues thinke these thinges maye bee obserued because they put garlands about the neckes heads of their Images c. Ciprian witnesseth that the Eucharist or Communion was wont to bée giuen to infants And contrariwise our aduersaries themselues thinke not this expedient to bee done Irenaeus sayth that by tradition Christ suffered when he was almost fiftie yeres old Contrariwise the Church hath most constantlye refused that saying Clemens referreth his Canon to the Apostles making them authors thereof On the other side euen the Church of Rome her selfe hath a long time reiected those Canons as if they had bene forged by heretikes Furthermore Zepherius Bishoppe of Rome hath receiued sixtie of the same Canons and after the sixt Synode receiued 85 c. Finally that we may leaue infinit of such examples and come vnto our aduersaries those things which they referre vnto the Apostles histories attribute to others as Lent to Telephorus c. So that nowe by these examples the truth of our minor proposition is made manifest It the olde heretikes for the most part when the worde of God failed them did â—he vnto traditions falsely fathered them vpon the Apostles and our aduersaries doo thee same now at this time Then truly in this point they are to be accounted rather among the heretikes then with the true Catholikes The Antecedent is true Therefore the consequent is also true The Maior proposition is manifest of humselfe And the Minor is thus prooued They which vrged the ceremonies of the lawe did shroude themselues vnder
Secundum ignorantiam Elenchi as the Schoolemen saie because they put in other words then the Apostle Paule vsed For thus Paule saith Yee are our Epistle not written with inke but with the spirite of God for he speaketh of the inuisible Scriptures neither doth he therfore vtterly take awaie the visible as his Epistle which he then wrote to the Cornthians is witnesse But our aduersaryes reason farre otherwise for they say the Epistle not written in Tables but deliuered by hand the which is farre both from the words and minde of the Apostle Now let vs ouerthrowe the consequence of our aduersaries being ful of absurdities and without reason If we must not absolutely stick vnto the writings of the Apostles because God hath written the Gospell in the mindes of the godly the should it followe that the writings of the Apostles are not necessarie for godlie men If all things as they saie are not written which are necessarie to saluation to what end then appertaineth the scriptures For all things saie they that are necessarie to saluation God hath written in the mindes of the godlie But this argument cannot bee concluded in one part onely for either it is vniuersallie true or els vniuersally false so the whole authoritie of the scriptures must bee vtterly abolished the which God forbid Againe If this consequence be of anie force that is to saye we must haue recourse to vnwritten traditions because GOD hath written the gospell in the minds of the godly then would it followe that the spirituall efficacie of God should be confounded with the externall and visible ministerie of the Apostles and that traditions deliuered by mouth are the inuisible Scriptures of God the which the holie Ghost did imprint in the mind of the faithfull the which thing is most false Againe if they make any good conclusion out of that place of Ieremie that all thinges are not written that appertaine to the Gospell because vnder the new testament God doth write his law in the minds of the faithfull when as it was written in tables vnder the old testament Ergo by the force of this opposition it followeth that God in the old testament did onely remit sinne in part and that he was the God of the Israelites but in part also because that Ieremie addeth saieng that it wil come to passe that in the new testamēt God will remit the sins of the people and be their God The which is too too absurde and contrarie to the opinion of all men Now finally let vs turne this argument of our aduersaries vpon themselues saie thus All the lawes of God are written in the hearts and minds of the faithfull as our aduersaries seeme to affirme by the former places cited for Paule saith it is not written with inke but with the spirit of God but none of the traditions of our aduersaries are written in the minds of the godly for they are written with inke and not with the spirit of God Ergo none of our aduersaries traditions are the lawes of God So that héereby it is most manifest as I suppose how foolish or rather no argumēt at al this argument of our aduersaries is y ◠which that we may correct we must saie with the word of God that the writings of the Apostles and Euangelists doth containe all that doctrine of the Gospell the which the Apostles and Euangelistes did teach and afterward put in writings the which also God by his spirit did write in the mindes of the godly thus much touching this obiection And now we come vnto the second The Church of Christ for the space of 20. yeares wanted the writings of the Apostles and was only contented with their traditions Ergo the writings of the Apostles are not absolutely necessarie vnto saluation neither is it needfull that al things appertaining to the doctrine of the Gospel shuld be contained in the writings of the Apostles The Antecedent is manifest by reading of histories Although I doo not meddle much with the antecedent neither doo dispute touching the number of yeares yet would I that the readers should call to their remēbraunce that the Church wanted not the scriptures before that the Gospell was extant by the writings of the Apostles Yea that Christ himselfe and the Apostles did preach the Gospell out of the writings of the Prophets as before in his proper place we haue shewed Wherefore the antecedent of our aduersaries is no other thing then a foundation laid vpon sand or water so that the conclusion which they bring cannot stand Therefore I denie the consequent for the errour is as the Logitians tearme it Secundum ignorantiam Elenchi for they chaunge the forme of affirmation come from the time past vnto the time present and the time to come The Church saye they wanted the gospel Be it so although the writings of the Prophets to contayne the promises of the Gospell insomuch that the Apostles did altogether depende vppon the sayd writings of the Prophets adde héer vnto also if it please you that the writings of the Apostles were not altogether necessarie what doo you héereof conclude That they are not now therfore necessarie or héereafter shall not bée What man is so ignorant to grant that This is the difference y ◠the Apostles ought first to haue preached by mouth before they committed anie thing to writing And when the Apostles did preach the gospell they did then publish by mouth those thinges which afterward they wrote But sithens the Apostles died coulde not by mouth instruct the Church without doubt their writings are now so necessarie vnto vs as their preching by mouth was in those dayes in stéede whereof their writinges doo nowe remaine Let vs bring them therfore to an absurditie If the consequence of our aduersaries be of force or value this is also of force or value the Church of the Isralites not twentie yeares but two thousande yeares or somewhat more wanted the law written therefore it was not necessarie to the Church that the lawe should be written or the law written contained not all those things y e wer necessarie to y e doctrine of y e old testamēt But this is very absurd Let vs turne the argument of our aduersaries against themselues after this manner If God being perfect wise hath not suffered the church of Christ long time to want the writings of the Apostles both that hee might maintaine the truth of the Gospell as also he might prouide for the safegarde of his church Ergo these men are blasphemous against the prouidence of god which denie that all things are contained in the apostolicall writings which are necessarie to the doctrine of the Gospell For to what end would God by his diuine prouidence that the Apostles should write the gospell which they by mouth did preach was it because they should deliuer an vncertain and imperfect doctrine Furthermore if
Scriptures Againe If anie of those men vvhich are reported to haue the holie spirit of God doo saie anie thing of himselfe vvhich may not be proued by the holie Scriptures beleeue him not Doth Manes the Heretike say that the summe or the monie worke anie thing of themselues Where hast thou read this If he haue not read it in the Scriptures but speaketh it of himselfe it is manifest that he hath not the spirit of God And againe those that are true Christians let them betake themselues to the Scriptures because there canne be no other proofe of true christianitie then the diuine and holy Scriptures Basil It is a manifest Argument of infidelitie a flat signe of pride if anie man will reiect anie of those thinges which are not vvritten or bring into the Church anie of those things vvhich are not vvritten sith the Lord himselfe sayth My sheep heare my voyce and follovve not a straunger Againe Whatsoeuer vve speake or doo that ought to be confirmed by the testimonie of the holie Scriptures Also the Apostle taking the example from men Gal. 3. doth most vehemently forbid that anie of those thinges which are in the holy Scripture should be put out or else vvhich God forbid that anie thing should be added Againe If vvhatsoeuer is not of faith is sinne and faith commeth by hearing and hearing by the vvorde of GOD Then vvithout doubt sith vvhatsoeuer is vvithout the scriptures is not of faith the same is sinne And in another place Let vs stande to the iudgement of the holy Scriptures proceeding from GOD and vvith vvhome so euer are founde pointes of religion agreeing to the holie Scriptures to them let the vvhole opinion of truth bee alotted Againe of all those things vvhich vve haue in vse both of vvords and deeds some are distinctly set dovvne in the Scriptures some omitted but those things which are contained in the scriptures by no meanes must be omitted but of those things which are not found in the scriptures we haue a flat rule deliuered vnto vs by Paule All things are lawful but all things are not necessarie Hierome The vniuersall Church of Christ hauing in possession all the Churches in the world is vnited together by the vnitie of the spirit and hath the words of the Lawe of the Prophets of the Gospell and of the Apostles and she may not passe hir bounds that is from the holie Scriptures Againe Those things which men faine with out authoritie of Scripture as comming frō the Apostles by Tradition the sworde of God which is his word doth cut away And also that which hath not the authoritie of the Scriptures is with the same facilitie contemned with the which it was allowed Augustine Neither ought I to alleadge the Nicene counsell neither thou the counsell of Aremineus as though we would determine causes therewith for neither I am boūd vnto the authoritie of the one neither thou of the other but let each thing with other each cause with cause reason with reason be tried by the authoritie of the scriptures And again Ther is cōstituted ordained one ecclesiasticall cannon or rule vnto the which belongeth the bokes of the Prophets and Apostles by whose writings we ought to iudge touching the writings of others whether they be faithfull or vnfaithfull Againe Our Lord wold that we shuld beleeue nothing against the confirmed authoritie of the Scriptures Againe Let vs bring foorth the diuine Ballaunce of the holie Scriptures and let vs weigh in them what so euer is of anie waight or value Damascene As a tree planted by the riuers of waters euen so doth the soule of man which is moistened by the heauenlie scriptures bring foorth timelie fruite which is true and perfect faith And againe Let vs receiue acknowledge and reuerence all those things which are deliuered vnto vs by the Lawe Prophets Apostles and Euangelists seeking nothing which is not contained in them And least we should seeme altogether to neglect and despise the Schoolemen heare what Scotus saith It is most manifest that the Scriptures sufficiently doo containe all doctrine necessarie to the pilgrime that trauaileth heere in the world Peter Stelliaco Wee must runne vnto the scriptures alone that we may attain eternall life And Gracianus in his decrees doeth repeat that sentence of Augustine which wee haue before rehersed And many more may be recited vnto the like effect but heere we cease because wee will wander no farther That we may now therefore make an ende of the obiections of our aduersaries which they gather from y e writings of the Doctors we will comprehend the effect of all those their obiections which they haue or can bring forth in an argument which is thus The Doctors of the Church haue thought that besides the holie Scriptures traditions not written ought also to be receiued Ergo all those things which are necessarie vnto faith and saluation are not contained in the Scriptures Let vs now trie their antecedent It is manifest by y e testimonies of the ancient Fathers which before wée haue alleadged y t those auncient fathers haue not written all alike touching traditions for first it behooued to knowe the minde and opinion of the olde Doctors before they obiect them to vs. But let this be the full summe of all those things which the auncient doctors who are most to be accounted of haue written touching Traditions All those things which are deliuered either appertaine to the principles of religion and constitution of manners or else vnto ecclesiasticall rites and orders of the Church but those thinges which appertaine to principles of faith and manners are most surely contained in the Scriptures neither is it anie hinderāce if certaine kinds of spéech to the easie explication of doctrine principles of religion be not found by expresse words in the holy Scriptures so that the matter it selfe the sence signified by these tearms be extant in the scriptures But as touching those things which appertain vnto rites ecclesiasticall order if they agrée with the Scriptures and serue to the edification of the Church Yea finally if they be receiued with the common consent of the whole Church then are they with greate reuerence to be receiued and that this was the opinion and minde of the auncient Fathers I thinke it is sufficiently made manifest by these things which haue bene alleadged before whereby we may sée that the ground and matter of our aduersaries is false Now therfore I denie their consequent for the errour is in forme of reasoning the Argument is grounded vpon the misvnderstanding of the fathers Another errour is this for that they take that to bée graunted which lyeth betwéene vs in controuersie For thus standeth the case betwéene vs whether in confirming principles of faith the scriptures alone be to bée harde yea or nay But our aduersaries
Ergo because some of the Apostles did recite some out of the Ethnicks bookes it must follow that the Apostles did attribute authoritie to those bookes in matters of faith which thing is absurde and contrarie to the opinion of all men Let vs tourne this obiection vppon our aduersaries after this sort If the Apostles did at anie time recite the traditions of auncient fathers but onelie to beautifie those things which wer established and confirmed by most firme testimonies of holie scriptures How much lesse then ought wee to recite the traditions of the olde fathers to the confirming of those things which want testimonie of the Scripture Thus therefore we may amend the errour of this their obiection and saye that the Apostles whereas they did applie thēselues to the capacitie of men that they might thereby the better stirre them vp or the more easily conuince them they vsed some times the bookes Apocripha as also sentences gathred from Ethincks to wit when they did dispute of those things the truth whereof was manifest in the holye scriptures The heretikes did wreast the writinges of Paule that in the verie time of the Apostles and also it is most manifest that the heretiks yea Sathan himselfe haue cloked their heresies euen with the Scriptures ergo we must not cleaue to the Scriptures alone The antecedent is proued 2. Pe. 3. as also by the Ecclesiasticall historie and also Math 4. If thou be the sonne of GOD cast thy selfe down headlong for it is written he shal giue his Angells charge ouer thee c. I admit their antecedent But I denie their consequent Neither doth Peter so conclude but rather calleth them vnto the writings of Paule then in anie part to abridge the same The error is as the Logitians say Secundum non causam vt causam The heretikes abused the Scriptures wrested the writings of the Apostles into a contrarie sence ergo saye they we ought to run other where then to the scriptures to the establishing of our faith The Scripture is not in fault but onely men themselues which doo wrest so worthie a matter vnto their owne errours Wherefore this is so farre from the Apostles minde that we should leaue the aide of the scripture because heretikes haue abused them that rather the heretikes are by the verie scriptures to be conuinced like as we haue alreadie proued out of the places of Paule 2. Tim. 3. Tit. 1. And when Sathan abused the Scriptures that he might weaken the faith of Christ truely Christ went not to traditions but with the Scriptures again ouerthrew the enimy For sathan obiecting and saying it is written Christ also on the other side answered it is written and not left in tradition And therefore we must bring them to this inconuenience saying If because the heretikes falsified the Scriptures we may not therefore only cleaue vnto the Scriptures then truely because the heretikes falsely fathered traditions to be Apostolike as wee haue prooued before both out of the writings of the Apostles as also out of Irenaeus and Eusebius therefore wee may not sticke onely to traditions And againe because heretikes abused both Scriptures and traditions therefore we must neyther cleaue to Scriptures nor to traditions the which is absurde and euen our aduersaries themselues yeeld to the same Let vs therefore turne their argument vpon themselues saying If like as Sathan abused the Scriptures against Christ so likewise the heretiks do against true Christians Then truly as Christ vsed the Scripture onely to repell Sathan so likewise the true Christians must vse onely the Scriptures in repelling of heretikes And therefore we may amend their error thus If such be the wickednes of the heretikes y e they abuse y e scriptures then ought we to giue al diligēce y t the scripture may kéepe both their authoritie and puritie the which will be if the heretiks be conuinced by the Scriptures alone and those places which shall séeme somewhat obscure maye take their interpretation from places more plaine But if our aduersaries hearken not vnto vs yet at the least waies let them giue eare euen vnto themselues in whose decretalls this sentence remaineth That from the Scriptures themselues the sence of truth must be taken The doctrine touching the baptisme of Infants is not found in the holy Scriptures neither these words Trinitie like substance persons manie such like all which words notwithstanding do appertaine vnto groūds and principles of faith Ergo all things appertaining vnto faith are not to be found in the Scriptures The antecedent is found true by reading of the Scriptures Now touching their antecedent I saie thus In that they affirme the doctrine concerning Baptisme of children not to be found in the Scriptures is most false like as our late writers haue taught in theyr learned workes against the Anabaptistes touching the which I will not héere make any longer disputation least I shuld séeme to wander without y e compasse of my proponed questiō Now touching these words Trinitie like substance and persons I confesse they are not found in the writings of the Apostles but yet I saie y ◠the verie doctrine which is signified by these words is deriued from the Scriptures for when certaine heretiks rose vp which denied y e veritie of y e doctrine then the godly Fathers which liued in those daies hauing care of y e circumstances added these wordes by the which they might the more easily explicate declare the doctrine touching y e trinitie y ◠which doctrine they had before confirmed by expresse and manifest testimonies of the holy Scriptures Now touching their consequence The error is Secundum fallaciam figurae dictionis These words Trinitie the baptisme of infants like substance are not found in the Scripture it is called Omonomos for the words indéede are not found in the holie Scriptures but the things signified by the words are there found And our christian faith consisteth not in the title of words but in substance of matter not in many volumes of bookes as S. Hierom saith but in the verye ground of reason And therefore Basil confesseth y ◠he vsed against the heretikes certaine termes which were not found written but yet notwithstanding saith he they were nothing contrary to the sence of the holy Scriptures And therfore our aduersaries reasoning thus we may wel bring them to an absurditie saying If because the persons the trinitie and such like words be not extant in the holy Scriptures it therfore followeth that all things necessarie to faith are not found in the holye scriptures Ergo these words are necessarie to faith and so by force of the consequent Sith this worde Omoousios that is like substance and such other wordes were onely found out by the godly Doctors after the heresie of Arius began to spring then wold it followe that the Church of Christ before the time
straight waies propone to vs the opinion of Doctours and thereby they by and by conclude that the Scriptures alone are not to be heard to wit being vnmindful that this selfe same thing is a controuersie betwéene vs. For if this opinion touching the which we doo dispute may be determined by the writings of the Doctors then it followeth that the scriptures alone are not to be heard in establishing articles of faith Wherefore our aduersaries doo not rightly dispute their first principle béeing not rightly applyed Wherefore the errour of their former conclusion is thus to be corrected In asmuch as the writings of all the Doctors must be brought vnto the rule of the holy scriptures both the word of God so commaunding it and also the Doctors themselues consenting therevnto and the olde Doctors of the Church themselues haue taught that euery article of our faith must be grounded vpon the scriptures only furthermore Ecclesiastical rytes and ceremonies if they agrée with the scriptures if they serue to the edification of the church yea finally if they be receiued with common consent of the whole Church that then they are to be receiued with great reuerence Now héere we must diligently search out whether that this opinion of the Doctours be agréeable to the word of god so that so farre it is to be receiued as it hath his confirmation by the Scriptures And because our whole Disputation is heere had onely touching principles of doctrine necessarie to faith and saluation that we may not seeme to wander from our proposed question we héere cease neyther will we take vppon vs the disputation of ecclesiasticall rites and ceremonies which disputatioâ— if the matter so require and God so permit vs we will take in hand But nowe we defer it vnto another time Thus haue I â—â—â—â—ding to the methode proposed to wit dâ—â—â—ely and schoolelike by the authoritie 〈◊〉 most learned Fathers disputed in defence of the word written against the traditions of men Whereby the truth of our cause appeareth and the obscure deceipts and errors of our aduersaries are brought into open show for in such sort haue we set down opened and confirmed our minde and iudgement and so confuted and dissolued the errours and arguments of our aduersaries both by the holy scriptures and also by the writings of the auncient fathers that euerie man may easily sée this doctrine which our reformed church by the word of God which is therfore the true Catholike Church doth hold and professe is most true which is That All doctrine necessarie to our Christian faith and Religion is contained in the holie Scriptures Laus Deo In Psa 43. Ios 6. Psa 54. Plut. in Cic. De doct Christ lib. 3. cap. 14 De nat deor lâ— 2. 2. Epist 3. The preacher ought to teach reproue Tit â— Aug Enc. ad Laure To reproue false doctrine the right vse of disputation is no small helpe In laud. Basil Epist 151 Contra Aca. li. 3 ca 13. 〈…〉 They are refuted vvhich wold not haue diuines me dle vvith the true art of disputing Col. 2. Aduer 159. Epis in cap. 2. Esa De praescri haer A similitude Ad 150. Epi in S ca. Esai The auncient Fathers coÌ„mended â— right vse of Logick Con. Acali 3 De ord li. 2. ca. 12 Touching the writings and disputations of y â— schoole Doctors In. 3. sent dist 24. quest 1. Great but vnprofitable is the labour of the schoole Doctors Certaine Errours which are to bee found in the disputations of the schoole Doctors The first errour to make their ground Logicke See Scotus and others who haue vvritten vpon the master of sentences and in their disputations called Quodlibets c. Lomb. li. 1. Sent. dist 34. li. 2. sent dist 9. c â— Error To reasoÌ„ probably on plaine truths Contra Aca. Apolog ad 〈◊〉 louin 3. Error They darken the truth Con. Aca. Error 4 Is theyr vaine questions 2. Tim. 2 Eâ—chi â—d Lauren. cap. 55. The Popish schol doctours of ouâ— time frame not such argumentes in their disputations as y â— auncient learned vvere vvont The method to dispute both diuinely schoole like necessatie in our time Dâ— doct Chri. lib. 2. cap. 40. Tvvo vvayes to intreat of diuinitie A similitude The brief school like treatises are as it vver an Anatomy of y e large and copious vvriting or speakings Cout Maâ— lib. 3. De mod in disp Ser. A treatise of y e word of God vvritten Hovv the disputations of diunitie differ froÌ„ others that they ought reuerently to bee handled De doct Chri. li. 4. cap. 19 1. Tim. 6. Quest ver 108. De Ciuie Dei li. 2. cap. 29. 1 The vse of this disputation Psal 119. The diuisioÌ„ of this vvorke He 1. ve â— Our opinion and mind touching the vvorde of God The declaration of our opinion or minde The opinion and minde of y e Papistâ— The declaration exposition of their opinion The state point of this coÌ„trouersie The tearms of this question expounded What the vvorde of God is What tradition is What is meant by this word Necessarie to saluation What is meant by holye Scripture A demonstratiue or euident disputation Heb. 1 The Sylogisme or argument The explication or proofe of the argument The confirmation of the coÌ„ference Tert. de resur car Act. 26. The confirmation of the second part of the argument Ioh 20. 17 Rom. 1. Lu. 16 Iohn 6. Act. 26. Lu. 24 2 Pet. 1. Act. 1 Iude. Philip. 3. 1. Iohn 1. 2. Pet. 3. 2. Pet. 1. The argument The explication or proofe of the argument Deu 4. Prou. 30. The argument The examining or triall of y e argument Exod. 24. Deu. 31. Deu. 28. Act. 24. Deu. 27. Gal. 3 Esa 8. The argument The examining or triall of the argument Act. 26. 2. Cor 3. c. 2. Tim. 3. The argument The examining or triail oâ— y e silogisme 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Iohn 5. The argument The explication or triall of the argument Lu 23. 31. 1. Pet. 4. 17 c. 1. Cor. 4. The Sylogisme The exaaminatioÌ„ of the Silogisme An euideÌ„t argument Iohn 20. The argument The explication of the argument Psa 19 Psa 119 Deu. 4. Psa 4. The argument The explication of the argument Gal. 4. 21. * A definitioÌ„ of holy Scripture Heb. 1. 1 2. Ti. 3. 16 Heb 1. 1. 2. Pet. 1. 21 Lu. 1. 3 1. Iohn 1. 1. Ioh. 20. 31 c. The explicating of the definition 2. Pe. 3. 1. 2 Col. 3. 1 Pro. 30. 6 Esa 8. 20 c. Psa 1. 19. 1. 9 c 2. Tim. 3 16. 17. 2. Pe. 1. 12 Ioh. 20. 31 2. Tim. 3 15 Iohn 5. 39 The argument The vnfolding of y e former reason A disputation confutatiue vherein is refelled or confuted the opinioÌ„ or iudgement of y e Papistes The first argument against papistical traditions The vnfolding of